boringuser2
It's a bit of a misunderstanding of how LLMs are supposed to be used.
One caveat is if you're very untalented, it might be able to solve very common patterns successfully.
This is an odd framing in my experience because regarding housing they're almost always Jews.
Not your typical "frat guy".
I have a strong preference for precise language.
Turns out leaving all of this to the profit motive puts people on the street. Amazing.
Regarding France, my understanding is that their scores are some of the lowest in Europe and below the OCED average on the PISA exam (comparatively, the United States is above the OCED average), though there might be demographic considerations.
I.e. Einstein reading their works and copying their conclusions.
This is highly likely to have happened, regardless of the "completeness" of one work or another.
The thing I like about this is that it levels celebrity (something man-made) with rationality.
Why not reduce Einstein's celebrity? It reflects reality more accurately to do so.
The author is fine, he can publish whatever he pleases. I can't stop him, as you've pointed out.
From a meta-commentary perspective, it is actually quite interesting that Einstein's alleged plagiarism covers many diverse sources.
That's literally why they're there in the first place.
During covid-19, when immigration was suppressed and the labor surplus was attenuated, something amazing happened -- wages rose across the board in America.
Yes, outsourcing is a huge issue. It is dealt with in various ways, and there are substantial barriers to in sourcing (my company has tried to do this, but decided to hire in America due to substantial costs).
Immigration is also a huge causative factor impacting wages and labor bargaining.
If you're a protectionist, that's good, I also support that. But you should probably apply your ideology across the board rather than selectively, which I suspect you cannot do due to your partisanship.
The perfect example is Bernie Sanders going from "immigration is obviously bad because its a tool capitalist's use to undercut American labor" to generic racial grievance "progressive" guy.
Making things seems to do the trick there.
That kid that blows you away will likely stagnate like all of us, he might pick up a few tricks, though.
I've seen interns that are better than some of my 15+ year colleagues.
I'm better than most of them myself, but I've also seen interns better than me -- better problem solving skills and attention to detail I suppose. Very inconsistent correlation in terms of time spent outside of filtering people. Of course, you used to have a knowledge advantage that would hold for a bit, but intelligent usage of GPT-4 removes even that.
I'm pretty sure the whole enterprise is a combination of being gifted intellectually, with maybe a sprinkle of actual effort and abilify to sustain your attention on supremely boring tasks -- but mostly just your innate gifts at work.
When I say "better than"... well, here's my opinion: In programming, someone more talented can be up to 10x more productive at each tier of competence, shall we say. My least productive (senior and junior) colleagues are 10-100x less productive than me. My most productive colleagues (senior and junior) are probably 10x more productive than me.
This is an interesting discussion to me because I used to believe the whole tiered conception of programming knowledge until I learned that this wasn't the case through experience.
It's all just problem solving, and you're either smarter or less smart and you can't change this with even 1000 years of study.
We've lost reems of technology to I*aeli espionage.
It was challenging and made me question whether or not I had it in me to code. Turns out, I could, and, vis-a-vis my peers, exceptionally well.
Well, I took me, but this book was my first real introduction to computer science.
Funnily enough, I didn't then and don't now personally care for the author (he seems untalented as a teacher), but I feel he accidentally made a good resource in his hubris.
The quality of life improvement from not being obese is obscene.
Also, using heuristics to make judgments about situations is how intelligence works.
First of all, I really find this term to be gross. You should be afraid of being unhealthy.
Second of all, are you posting that you have individual metabolic differences that substantially alter your caloric expenditure?
FYI most studies show very little innate caloric expenditure differences between human beings outside of what can be predicted based on their body mass. Ironically, heavier people burn more calories, not less, innately.
This makes sense because metabolic machinery is complex and so fundamental to life that it would obviously be very tightly tuned genetically.
I remember interviewing when I was chubbier post-COVID thinking that the only evidence the interviewer has of my self-control and drive is that I have none. Best case scenario, you are interviewing a temporarily embarrassed skinny person.
Noble prize winner James Watson, famous bluntly tell it like it is-er, said he didn't hire fat people for this reason.
(This has since been rectified by reinstating strength training and dietary controls, which I recommend.)